NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[2Kool4Skewl]

Is penalizing not a part of TF?

No, penalizing isn't part of TF.

[jl777]

We are searching for the right incentives for:

- running a node (this secures the network)
- running a node, have an open nxt account and forging with it (this secures the security of nxt = 51% attacks ?!) DONE by TF.

FIFY.

Even with transparent forging, Nxt is still susceptible to 90% PoS attacks.

Financial attack
Somebody buys up all the NXT.
I raised this, but CfB said is was acceptable

[2Kool4Skewl]

yes.. we're searching to a donations/bounties  to run a node .. or to forge ( help the Nxt server ) .

I think this is a bad idea. Either the network/nxt itself can care of or this will fail.

Yes, this is a bad idea.  NXT must be self-sustainable.  This is why splitting tx fees between forgers and hallmarked nodes is a good idea.  It encourages node participation.

[ChuckOne]

We are searching for the right incentives for:

- running a node (this secures the network)
- running a node, have an open nxt account and forging with it (this secures the security of nxt = 51% attacks ?!) DONE by TF.

FIFY.

Even with transparent forging, Nxt is still susceptible to 90% PoS attacks.

This is what TF is about. Protecting the PoS system. 90% is good enough for me.

We are now talking in length about the PoW system. We have many incentive programs to ensure that PoW is performed and even a prospect (no forging-only nodes) to having service providers install a node in the network. I think that should suffice.

[cc001]

could anybody send some testNXT to 14982679201235752929 please? thanks

I've send you 1KTestNxt  

received, thx

I've sent you another 4K TestNxt   

yep, I've seen it, thx. I could make you a special price for some peanuts?

[ChuckOne]

We are searching for the right incentives for:

- running a node (this secures the network)
- running a node, have an open nxt account and forging with it (this secures the security of nxt = 51% attacks ?!) DONE by TF.

FIFY.

Even with transparent forging, Nxt is still susceptible to 90% PoS attacks.

Financial attack
Somebody buys up all the NXT.
I raised this, but CfB said is was acceptable

"Somebody buys up all the NXT."  <<< How?

[bitcoinpaul]

Is penalizing not a part of TF?

No, penalizing isn't part of TF.

I thought we utilize TF with its full potential only if we have penalties in place.

[2Kool4Skewl]

We are searching for the right incentives for:

- running a node (this secures the network)
- running a node, have an open nxt account and forging with it (this secures the security of nxt = 51% attacks ?!) DONE by TF.

FIFY.

Even with transparent forging, Nxt is still susceptible to 90% PoS attacks.

Financial attack
Somebody buys up all the NXT.
I raised this, but CfB said is was acceptable

Yes.  It would be very hard to mount this attack, because you would have to own 90% of the currency.

[mcjavar]

We are searching for the right incentives for:

- running a node (this secures the network)
- running a node, have an open nxt account and forging with it (this secures the security of nxt = 51% attacks ?!) DONE by TF.

FIFY.

Even with transparent forging, Nxt is still susceptible to 90% PoS attacks.

Financial attack
Somebody buys up all the NXT.
I raised this, but CfB said is was acceptable

Or someone steals (yes, I am looking at you MtGox) 90+% which can happen if we have 10-12 pools with most of the coins in them.

[wesleyh]

@jean-luc

NRS is generating errors constantly. See the console in chrome.

Refused to set unsafe header "Content-length" (index):1
46
Refused to set unsafe header "Content-length"

Hundreds of these errors after a few minutes.

This is also why I can't release an update to NxtMac - apparently the safari version included in cocoa does not like these errors at all and does not show any output (peers, blocks, etc).

Please fix.

[redsn0w]

yes.. we're searching to a donations/bounties  to run a node .. or to forge ( help the Nxt server ) .

I think this is a bad idea. Either the network/nxt itself can care of or this will fail.

I think this isn't a bad idea  .. more donations / bounties = more node .


Why this idea is a bad idea   

[bitcoinpaul]

Or someone steals (yes, I am looking at you MtGox) 90+% which can happen if we have 10-12 pools with most of the coins in them.

Wrong. Lease forging power to pools means not give NXT away.

[2Kool4Skewl]

We are searching for the right incentives for:

- running a node (this secures the network)
- running a node, have an open nxt account and forging with it (this secures the security of nxt = 51% attacks ?!) DONE by TF.

FIFY.

Even with transparent forging, Nxt is still susceptible to 90% PoS attacks.

Financial attack
Somebody buys up all the NXT.
I raised this, but CfB said is was acceptable

Or someone steals (yes, I am looking at you MtGox) 90+% which can happen if we have 10-12 pools with most of the coins in them.

This cannot happen if the pools just have forging rights, but don't hold the NXT in their account.

[ChuckOne]

We are searching for the right incentives for:

- running a node (this secures the network)
- running a node, have an open nxt account and forging with it (this secures the security of nxt = 51% attacks ?!) DONE by TF.

FIFY.

Even with transparent forging, Nxt is still susceptible to 90% PoS attacks.

Financial attack
Somebody buys up all the NXT.
I raised this, but CfB said is was acceptable

Or someone steals (yes, I am looking at you MtGox) 90+% which can happen if we have 10-12 pools with most of the coins in them.

Therefore no pools and no forging power leasing IMHO.

[bitcoinpaul]

Is penalizing not a part of TF?

No, penalizing isn't part of TF.

I thought we utilize TF with its full potential only if we have penalties in place.

[2Kool4Skewl]

yes.. we're searching to a donations/bounties  to run a node .. or to forge ( help the Nxt server ) .

I think this is a bad idea. Either the network/nxt itself can care of or this will fail.

I think isn't a bad idea  .. more donations / bounties = more node .


Why this idea is a bad idea   

What happens when you run out of funds for donations / bounties?

[2Kool4Skewl]

Is penalizing not a part of TF?

No, penalizing isn't part of TF.

I thought we utilize TF with its full potential only if we have penalties in place.

I don't think so, but you'd have to ask Come-from-Beyond.

[jl777]

If you have your node running, but don't have any NXT, you are not securing the blockchain.

This is why the NXTcoins will payout dividends in NXT. for a signing bonus, I will probably just seed every miner with 1 NXT

James, please do not build upon false statements.

? What false statements. What do you think I am saying?

[redsn0w]

yes.. we're searching to a donations/bounties  to run a node .. or to forge ( help the Nxt server ) .

I think this is a bad idea. Either the network/nxt itself can care of or this will fail.

I think isn't a bad idea  .. more donations / bounties = more node .


Why this idea is a bad idea   

What happens when you run out of funds for donations / bounties?

You did not understand my idea, I do not mean to repay the costs of a node ... but only a part, for example 30% ..

[wesleyh]

@CFB / @Jean-Luc:

What is the minimum amount an asset should be sold for?

Is it 0.01 nxt?

Or can it be lower 0.00001 nxt for example?

Why / why not?

Lower than 0.01 is necessary for doge.